Moneysavingexpert campaign to help savers

hallmark

pqrdef wrote: »

A myth created by the Right as part of their eternal campaign to reduce public spending with the aim of reducing their taxes.

Lol really? What do you say caused it then?

michaels

Oh - magic money then - actually the compensation funds come from a levy paid by all banks based on the size of ther deposits and it is paid by the banks when payouts are needed, there is no pot of money just sitting somewhere waiting for when RBS goes bankrupt. And funnily enough if a big bank did go bust the remaining banks would not have enough funds to bail out that banks depositors. During the previous phase of the crisis when Northern Crock etc went bust the Govt lent the FSCS money as the remaining 'solvent' banks did not have enough money to pay out all in one go.

Basically the problem was too much savings, and savers looking for a return on their money without taking any risk. The banks tried to provide these returns by lending to perceived low risk borrowers such as asset backed mortgages. Of course higher returns are actually only available when running more risk and when the risk became defaults the banks had to be bailed out to protect the savers. Just because you don't like it or it doesn't seem fair doesn't mean it isn't correct.

Lokolo wrote: »

Er................

Graham_Devon

Lokolo wrote: »

Yep! I just think it helps that I am financially aware, so can limit the problems I could have.

Depends on many factors, and also your age. But when you think that 20% of under 25's are currently unemployed. Others start working life with student debts, which are increasing...it does make you think...it will take quite a few years of work just to get to a neutrality point where you own more than you owe.

This is something often not taken into consideration when comparing today with yesterdays generation.

We've had 20 somethings taking debt, and rolling it up into a mortgage, via 125% mortgages, and, as the commentator said, they are often in negative equity on an interest only mortgage.

So often if you bought a house you are stuck. If you didn't you are saddled with increasing rents and living costs, and that's if you are one of the luckier ones. Even worse if you are saddled with higher rents, with low job prospects and even higher uni debts.

And all we seem to do to "fix" the problem is increase the costs of living and increase the debt burden on the upcoming generation.

Not neccesarily doom mongering here, was just a viewpoint I listened to, but does make you think.

pqrdef

hallmark wrote: »

Lol really? What do you say caused it then?

Globalisation, the emergence of the BRIC economies, and the inadequate head-in-the-sand response of the West. Most of which seemed not to notice that if Americans bought all their consumer goods from China there might be some impact on American manufacturing.

There were many ways it could play out. In the event, Greenspan tried to fix it with low interest rates and the banks found a scam to exploit them. But if it hadn't gone that way, it would have gone a different way.

nearlynew

Saving and producing, as opposed to borrowing and consuming, is THE only way to a prosperous and sustainable future.

The last decade of fake prosperity built on debt will never work. Which is why we are now in the 5h1t.

michaels

Fine - let us all produce and save the proceeds of selling what we produce - I can't see any possible problem with everyone doing this at once.

nearlynew wrote: »

Saving and producing, as opposed to borrowing and consuming, is THE only way to a prosperous and sustainable future.

The last decade of fake prosperity built on debt will never work. Which is why we are now in the 5h1t.

nearlynew

michaels wrote: »

Fine - let us all produce and save the proceeds of selling what we produce - I can't see any possible problem with everyone doing this at once.

No.

Nor can I.

ILW

How about this then, Base rate 2% above inflation, Basic savings rates 1% over base, Basic mortgage rates 3% over base. Everebody should be happy.

hallmark

pqrdef wrote: »

Globalisation, the emergence of the BRIC economies, and the inadequate head-in-the-sand response of the West. Most of which seemed not to notice that if Americans bought all their consumer goods from China there might be some impact on American manufacturing.

There were many ways it could play out. In the event, Greenspan tried to fix it with low interest rates and the banks found a scam to exploit them. But if it hadn't gone that way, it would have gone a different way.

First thing you've said I've agreed with.

So most of what you say IS just trolling then..?

Cleaver

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I have no debt secured or unsecured or indeed a credit card. so yes I think savers have been given a raw deal and it's about time that changed

Haven't investors been given a rawer deal lately? Do they deserve more support? Kind of a devil's advocate type of question, but probably worth asking.